Construction wide issue?

[finneyb]

As I see it the pension deficit issue will be construction industry wide.

Therefore it seems reasonable to think that any 'solution' needs also to be industry wide ie should HPA be joining with others in a similar position. It gives bigger political clout, pooling of experience and expertise etc.

[John Ratsey]

It's a UK-wide problem (and the USA for that matter).  The pension rules and investment performance have created a growing deficit which threatens to bankrupt companies. Some look for innovative solutions such as this http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22203889. HPS was considered to be in surplus about 20 years ago so we had a contributions holiday. Then about 10 years ago it was realised that the actuaries had been looking into a cloudy crystal ball. This article explains a lot http://www.economist.com/node/5436947.

John

[Stephen Brichieri-Colombi]

Yes, it is an issue in the sector, but also outside this sector.
As I see it, our common interest is with other Pensioner Associations (PA's) rather than one particular sector. What role should PA's play, and how can they be made effective?
The pensions sector is quite tightly regulated and we should in principle, be in safe hands with the Trustees, the Pensions Regulator, the Pensions Advisory Service and, further down the line, the Pension Protection Fund. But, as the Maxwell case showed, vigilance is required. Companies can act quickly and impose Non-Disclosure Agreements which mean that we, and the regulators, learn about events too late to take action. One of the tasks of the HPA is to keep everyone on their toes.
For example, after my first day in the High Court, I spoke with the Pensions Regulator, who agreed to try and get a barrister briefed in time for the continuation, scheduled 3 days later. When I called again to say the judge had brought the continuation forward by 24 hours, the PR said they could not move in the time available. If the PR had been there, together with the HPS trustees, the outcome might have been a restructured deal with some funds going to the HPS. We did our best, but did not have adequate professional advice or support.
There is an association of PA's, which we could consider joining, to find out how other pensioners take pro-active action. If we did join with them, as a group we might be able to get the Government to accord some PA's enough legal status to allow them access to more information, including lists of fellow pensioners, and reasons for delays in the publication of reports such as the Triennial Valuation     

[mscant]

I strongly agree that we should form liaison with other PAs. We could learn a great deal that would be of value to us I think, and also contribute to the group, to our mutual advantage.
On a slightly different tack, I think it would be a good tactic (as 'watchers' !) to focus on specific areas of interest where we may get an early warning of trouble brewing and to split up this task among us. We could draw up a list of websites, financial publications. CH2Mhill  etc to monitor.  We do this already, as individuals, perhaps we can lighten the load by hiving off particular sectors. 

[sallen]

I support the idea to make contact with other PAs' - we could learn a lot.

New subject:
Whilst sharing the ire about how the Pension Scheme was treated under the sale of Halcrow, I am also wondering what we can do, if anything, to support Halcrow / CH2MHill going forward? Their long term success is in our best interest; this  in addition to holding them to account which HPA is doing well. Thanks to all the Committee for your work.